Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

man jailed after meeting 12 year old girl on a dating app who pretended to be 19

140 replies

BorneBackCeaselesslyIntoThePas · 07/02/2019 19:38

Carl Hodgson, 27, brought the girl to his Manchester quayside apartment after he met her on a dating app - not realising she used a fake profile which claimed she was 'experienced'.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6679531/Office-worker-spent-night-12-year-old-girl-jailed.html

OP posts:
Bluntness100 · 08/02/2019 10:41

I'm a bit unsure about this one. My gut instinct tells me he really didn't think she was underage, because if he did he would very unlikely have sent a photo to his friend. Paedos know to keep it secret. They don't broadcast it. If he thought he was having sex with a twelve year that sort of image would only be shared with a fellow paedo. You wouldn't keep evidence you had sex with her and send it to a mate.

I've also met girls who are in this age range and do act and present a lot older, much is to do with their upbringing and who they spend time with ie older kids.

So I'm not sure. Both of them are saying he didn't know. I think there is a possibility this is really the truth.

On the other hand his image sending and associated message is appalling, but that's not why he is going to jail.

Littletabbyocelot · 08/02/2019 10:41

How the hell would it undermine our laws on rape to say sex with a 12 year old is automatically non-consensual? Which is what our laws do genuinely say. I'm sorry you don't believe me, but it is true.

NothingOnTellyAgain · 08/02/2019 10:43

He was found not guilty of rape and guilty of sexual activity with a child under 13.

If they are the same then why guilty of one and not the other.

Why most of the time is it only the single offence that men get charged with in situations like this.

It jumped out at me.

He was found not guilty of rape though as per the article.

NothingOnTellyAgain · 08/02/2019 10:44

Bluntness sex with an under 13 is a "no excuses" crime in the UK.

Thats' why he's gone to prison.

What he said /she said has been taken into account as he could have got 14 years.

NothingOnTellyAgain · 08/02/2019 10:46

"How the hell would it undermine our laws on rape to say sex with a 12 year old is automatically non-consensual? Which is what our laws do genuinely say. I'm sorry you don't believe me, but it is true."

I do believe you Confused

The crime is sexual activity with a child under 13. Which is what he was found guilty of.

Littletabbyocelot · 08/02/2019 10:48

Sorry, notonthetelly, we do mostly agree and just have slightly different perspectives - for me, acknowledging it as rape recognises that and under 13 is always the victim and should be protected not punished. 'sexual activity with a child' plays into the idea that they did consent so it wasn't that wrong.

Anyway, I totally agree with your reaction to people wanting her punished. This is a 12 year old who sneaks out at night to have sexual activity with strangers. She has been failed very badly somewhere, is still a child and needs protection.

Bluntness100 · 08/02/2019 10:48

I think you've misunderstood my post. I'm fully aware of why he went to prison. As are all of us I suspect.

My post was in relation to whether he knew or not. The comment on him not being jailed for simply being a mysogynistic arsehole, was not meant to indicate I was unaware of why he was sentenced. Hmm

MagicMix · 08/02/2019 10:49

It is astonishing to me that there are people who think the child deserves some kind of additional punishment. She's been sexually assaulted by an adult man. She has already been punished most severely. Poor, poor child.

Of course it is the responsibility of all adults pursuing sexual relationships to make absolutely sure that the other party consents and this includes making sure that they are capable of consent. If you're not prepared to take this responsibility seriously, you should not be having sex.

NothingOnTellyAgain · 08/02/2019 10:49

I linked to the relevant legislation earlier on.

I have never seen rape used in the UK to mean statutory rape.
The crime we have for that is called sexual activity with a child under 13.

By your logic, if a man rapes a child under 13, as in not because she is too young but because he forces her,
Then he would be charged with the same crimes as this man has been charged with.
There is nothing that can be added on.
That's not how it works. You can see that's not how it works.
Surely?

AssassinatedBeauty · 08/02/2019 10:50

I think it's disgusting that there are people wanting to punish a 12 year old child, one who has clearly already faced significant issues, for being a a vulnerable child! It doesn't matter in the slightest that she lied about her age, it doesn't matter if she was looking for men to have sexual with her. All that tells us is how damaged and vulnerable she already is.

The fact that the "reputation" of an adult man is more important to some people than protecting a vulnerable child is appalling.

Littletabbyocelot · 08/02/2019 10:50

I think the law gives the choice of both charges. I think rape is the right choice.

As I understand it, they didn't actually have sex, he claimed they did. Hence not being found guilty of rape.

NothingOnTellyAgain · 08/02/2019 10:51

Littletabby I am sure that they are used differently.
It doesn't make sense otherwise.
The legislation and loads of other news stories support that that's what the words mean in law here.

MorrisZapp · 08/02/2019 10:55

I'm not a fan of making men legally the sex 'doers' and women legally 'done to'. This casts all women as passive in their own private lives.

I've never asked anyone to prove their age to me in my life. It would seem a really weird thing to do on a date or in conversation on a dating app.

If someone creates a profile on an adult dating site then at least in some respects they have had agency.

NothingOnTellyAgain · 08/02/2019 10:56

Rape means non consensual penetration with a penis - orally, vaginally or anally.
They would not have ever taken a charge to court to prosecute for an act that didn't happen..

And like I say, if the two crimes are always used whenever a child is under 13 even when there's no suggestion that coercion or force was used
Then what can they reach for when coercion or force IS used.

I know you say that you think rape is a better term, but the term used in law is sexual activity with a child under 13.You thinking that's not a good name for it and you'd rather it was called rape is fair enough but it's not what the law says. And why it jumped out at me that he was also charged with rape (found not guilty).

Aeonium · 08/02/2019 10:58

I don’t think the child should be “punished” as such. She obviously needs help and support because her actions are not those of a normal 12yo. But at the same time I think she bears some culpability for what’s happened and the man in question shouldn’t bear sole responsibility or be punished for a situation that she created.

Littletabbyocelot · 08/02/2019 10:59

I read your link and the rest of the document. It confirms my work policies, Safeguarding training and recent experience. Consent is not a factor in the rape of under 13s.

My 'logic' is that because a child is too young, they lack the capacity to consent. Rape isn't just physical forcing, it is sex with the lack of consent. If a child cannot consent, it is rape.

Neither of us are going to convince the other, because in the end a stranger on the Internet whos expertise in the topic you know nothing about is not the most convincing.

AssassinatedBeauty · 08/02/2019 11:01

"I'm not a fan of making men legally the sex 'doers' and women legally 'done to'. This casts all women as passive in their own private lives."

People have talked about adults being responsible for ensuring their partners can consent, which includes checking they are old enough to consent. It's not just about men.

"If someone creates a profile on an adult dating site then at least in some respects they have had agency."

I don't know how this is relevant. "Agency" doesn't bypass the law. A child cannot consent to sex. Children as young as 12 who are creating profiles on adult dating sites need help and protection.

AssassinatedBeauty · 08/02/2019 11:04

"I think she bears some culpability for what’s happened and the man in question shouldn’t bear sole responsibility or be punished for a situation that she created."

Do you genuinely believe that no adult should be punished for having sex with a child, if the adult can show that the child was involved in creating the situation?

TheSmallAssassin · 08/02/2019 11:09

He was found not guilty of rape and guilty of sexual activity with a child under 13.

If they are the same then why guilty of one and not the other.

According to him there was no penetrative sex and as there's no other evidence he can't be found guilty of rape, @NothingOnTellyAgain

NothingOnTellyAgain · 08/02/2019 11:09

I'm not a fan of making men legally the sex 'doers' and women legally 'done to'. This casts all women as passive in their own private lives.
She was TWELVE. What does this have to do with adult women? She was firmly a child.

If someone creates a profile on an adult dating site then at least in some respects they have had agency.

The idea that twelve year old girls have agency when it comes to sex is as old as the hills and seems still a commonly held belief.

Heronymous · 08/02/2019 11:09

I don’t believe grown men are unable to tell 12 year old girls from adults.

NothingOnTellyAgain · 08/02/2019 11:14

Littletabby so you see no difference / or that the law sees / should see no difference between this situation and a situation where a man goes into a child's room and forces them to have sex?

I don't understand.
All my reading of similar cases has only had one charge, even where there was penetrative sex.
There is no allowance in law to differentiate between nonconsent because the child can't consent because they are too young, and nonconsent ie they have been attacked.

I am simply totally sure you are wrong.

I see a difference between this case (if there had been penetration) and a case where a man breaks into a house and rapes a child. You claim the law does not. That's just not true and if it was the MRA types would be up in arms.

NothingOnTellyAgain · 08/02/2019 11:16

"situation that she created"

He was the one who took her home, gave her booze, got some sex, photoed her and sent it to her mates.

He was hardly passive in all this.

NothingOnTellyAgain · 08/02/2019 11:17

"If someone creates a profile on an adult dating site then at least in some respects they have had agency."

Would you like the law around sexual contact with minors (12 and under) changed and if so in what way.

NothingOnTellyAgain · 08/02/2019 11:19

The amount of woman arguing that he definitely thought she was over 18 and she should not "get away with it" is bonkers.

No wonder Rotherham etc happened >

Way too many people see teen girls even young teen girls in a really worrying way. And are very happy to give enormous benefit of doubt to fully grown definitely adult men.

She was twelve and he was 27 let's just reiterate that.